Warren Wants To Tax Corporations For "Excessive" Lobbying

From Morning Consult:

Democratic presidential candidate Elizabeth Warren’s most recent tax proposal takes aim at limiting the influence of “excessive” corporate lobbying, a move nearly 1 in 2 registered voters say they would support. . . .

A Morning Consult/Politico survey conducted among 1,991 registered voters from Oct. 7-8 — just days after Warren unveiled her plan — asked voters whether they would support the proposal, which calls for a tax on corporations that spend more than $500,000 per year to lobby the government in favor of their causes. A 49 percent plurality of respondents backed Warren’s plan, while 22 percent said they were opposed. The poll has a margin of error of 2 percentage points. . . .

Warren’s plan would tax companies that spend between $500,000 and $1 million annually on government lobbying at a 35 percent rate, and escalate to 60 percent on every dollar spent above $1 million and 75 percent on every dollar above $5 million. Warren said the revenues resulting from those taxes would be set aside for federal agencies impacted by lobbying efforts and to fund congressional support resources.

Despite widespread support for general lobbying limitations, many voters were largely unaware of Warren’s plan. Thirty-nine percent of voters said they have seen, read or heard “nothing at all” regarding the proposal, while another 28 percent said their level of awareness of the plan was “not much.”

Trump Has Brought Together "A Collection Of Supervillains"

While campaigning, Donald Trump made a couple of promises to the American people. He said he would hire only the best people and that he would drain the "swamp" in Washington, D.C.. He has done neither. Instead, he has filled his administration (and our government agencies) with a cast of incompetents, criminals, and lobbyists. In other words, instead of draining the swamp, he has filled it with even more vicious monsters than before.

This is not just my opinion. Some honest Republicans are also starting to realize what Trump has done. Here is just some of what self=professed Republican Matt Lewis had to say in The Daily Beast:

This week’s news about Omarosa secretly taping chief of staff John Kelly and President Donald Trump is yet another reminder of something about Trumpworld: Politics has always attracted eccentric opportunists, but people in this administration are especially weird. 

In the case of Omarosa Manigault Newman, we are talking about a melodramatic reality star who lies constantly and brought a recording device into the Situation Room. But she’s just the latest example of the motley crew Trump has made famous.

Take, for example, the president’s campaign manager, Paul Manafort, who is currently on trial for tax and bank fraud and reportedly paid more than $18,000 for a python jacket. Or Trump’s former senior adviser, Steve Bannon, who studies obscure Italian fascists and insists on wearing multiple layers of clothing yet doesn’t seem to own a comb or a razor. 

And let’s not forget Rob Porter, the straight-looking Trump staffer who (allegedly) beat the hell out of two of his ex-wives before dating Hope Hicks. Seb Gorka was the Hungarian fugitive who was a villain straight out of central casting. Scott Pruitt was the former head of the EPA with a penchant for French cuisine and Ritz Carlton hand lotion. 

Only the best people?

Clearly, Trump likes casting people who are not just interesting characters, but who are also cartoon caricatures. There’s Rudy Giuliani, the bulging-eyed former “Mayor of America” who has become a parody of himself. There’s Mooch (Anthony Scaramucci), who is essentially a caricature of a fast-talking Italian businessman.

And Michael Cohen, the Trump lawyer who watched Goodfellas one too many times. And Corey Lewandowski, the erstwhile campaign manager who probably still has a poster of Lee Atwater hanging on his bedroom wall. And even Stephen Miller’s own uncle thinks he’s a schmuck. I could go on.

It’s almost as if Trump visited the far corners of the universe to bring together a collection of supervillains.

Trump Hasn't Drained The "Swamp" - He's Filled It

(This image of a "swamp" monster is by DonkeyHotey.)

During the 2016 campaign, Donald Trump used a very vivid image -- an image of Washington being a swamp infested by monsters who care only for their own gain. He promised his supporters that he would drain that swamp. That's a promise he seems to have forgotten since taking office.

Instead of draining that swamp, Trump has filled his administration with Wall Streeters, corporate CEO's, and an army of lobbyists. Those lobbyists are of special concern to the Office of Government Ethics, since many of them have slid into government jobs without being exposed to the glare of media publicity -- and they were concerned enough to ask the Trump administration for the waivers they issued to allow those lobbyists to get government jobs (waivers that are necessary before a lobbyist can work for our government).

The Office of Government Ethics wanted to know who those lobbyists were and what jobs they got, so they could be watched to see if they used their government job to benefit the companies they had lobbied for.

What was the response of the Trump administration? They have refused to produce the waivers signed by Donald Trump to allow those lobbyists to get government jobs. Trump and his cronies don't want the American public to know how many lobbyists got government jobs (and what those jobs were). They don't want the public to know that they not only failed to drain the swamp, but filled the swamp with many new and voracious predators.

Why aren't these waivers open to not only the Office of Government Ethics, but also to the general public. Doesn't the public have the right to know how many lobbyists were given government jobs, and who those lobbyists are?

This is just more evidence that the administration of Donald Trump is the most corrupt administration in modern history.

Are There Corporate Lobbyists Who Are "Super Delegates" ?

I ran across an interesting thing at the Texas Democratic Convention last weekend. Sanders supporters were trying to get signatures on a petition to ban corporate lobbyists from being Democratic super delegates. I didn't sign the petition because the several people who asked to to sign couldn't answer two simple questions --
1) How many corporate lobbyists are super delegates?
2) Can you name one corporate lobbyist who is a super delegate?
They didn't know, but enthusiastically assured me that they exist.

I have never heard of any corporate lobbyist (lobbying for Wall Street financial organizations or giant private corporations) who have been appointed by the DNC to serve as a super delegate -- and I don't believe there are any. Until I see proof that they actually exist, I'm not going to believe it. It sounds like another myth being passed around by the Sanders campaign to make the party look bad.

So, I challenge any Sanders supporter who reads this to provide that proof. Give me the name of one corporate lobbyist who serves as a Democratic super delegate, and tell me what private for-profit corporation he/she represents currently.

Now, I know there are some super delegates from some organizations that were elected by the DNC  (organizations like unions, Planned Parenthood, minority groups, etc.) -- and some of them may actually lobby for those groups. That is different. They represent traditional Democratic constituencies -- and I have no problem with a few of them having a delegate vote.

But the Sanders supporters were saying there are lobbyists serving as super delegates who represent a giant for-profit corporation -- and that's a vastly different thing. Do they really exist? If so, I would love to know who they are.

(Note -- the image above was found at Pinterest.)

The "Spoils" Of Lobbying The Federal Government

The image at left (from sodahead.com) is pretty representative of what is happening on the federal government level. Corporations spend millions of dollars to lobby Congress, and in return they get billions of dollars back from the government (in contracts, subsidies, and tax breaks).

Bill Moyers and Michael Winship have written an excellent article on this called "Dividing the Spoils". Here is some of what they had to say:

Consider the new report from the watchdog Sunlight Foundation: From 2007 to 2012, the two hundred most politically active corporations in the United States spent almost $6 billion for lobbying and campaign contributions. And they received more than $4 trillion in US government contracts and other forms of assistance. That’s $760 for every dollar spent on influence, a stunning return on investment.

Peter Overby at National Public Radio reported that “Military contractors lead the list of contract recipients, and they hover in the upper ranks of companies with the biggest campaign contributions.” Raytheon, BAE Systems, Lockheed Martin – all of them made hefty political donations to Republican campaigns. Not coincidentally, this year the Pentagon is due to spend $163 billion on research, development and procurement.

Then look at who’s expected to be the new Republican chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee – Thad Cochran of Mississippi. Breathlessly, The Washington Post writes, “This could mean additional funding for the Navy to modernize its fleet and potentially benefit contractors such as shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls.” Guess what company describes itself as “the largest manufacturing employer in Mississippi and a major contributor to the economic growth of the state,” not to mention a major contributor this year to Thad Cochran’s re-election campaign? Why, shiver our timbers, it’s Huntington Ingalls.

“The other dominant corporate sector is finance,” Overby said. “Some of the country’s biggest financial institutions — Goldman Sachs, Bank of America and others — are the top recipients of federal aid. That’s because it cost so much to rescue the financial sector after the 2008 market crash.”

Throw in the health insurers, media and telecommunications, retailers, Big Pharma – no wonder Washington’s K Street is lobbying’s road to Paradise. But it runs in both directions. NPR’s Overby talked with political scientist David Primo, who thinks Congress may be spending more time studying The Godfather than Robert’s Rules of Order. Primo told him, “The conventional wisdom out there is that businesses are going to Washington, writing checks and expecting big returns. But the other side of the story is that members of Congress may implicitly threaten businesses that if they don’t change their policy, or if they are not heavily involved in the political process, that bad things might happen to them.”

It’s not personal, Sonny, it’s strictly business. Our government has become a clearing house for corporations and plutocrats whose dollars grease the wheels for lucrative contracts and easy regulation. It’s all pay for play, and look the other way. Partisans of the system say, hey, it’s just business as usual, but that, of course, is the problem. We were struck by this headline in The Washington Post after the November elections: “Parties head back to Capitol to begin carving up spoils, remains from midterms.” Right: Not only leadership posts and committee chairmanships, but carving, dividing up the spoils also means divvying up the loot. And those contributions were not made for the sake of charity.

Once upon a time the GOP stood for Grand Old Party — now it stands for Guardians of Privilege, and this is payback time for everything from fracking to getting the big banks off the hook; from doing away with the minimum wage and coddling off-shore corporate tax avoiders to privatizing Medicare and Social Security; to gutting the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Environmental Protection Agency, even the US Postal Service.

And that’s just for starters. House Speaker John Boehner, his majority now greater than ever, will govern as you might expect from the man who once handed out checks from the tobacco industry to members on the floor. And Mitch McConnell, finally in his ascendancy as Senate Majority Leader, will manipulate more powerfully than ever the Capitol Hill and K Street mechanisms that he has mastered – helped along by the clever placement of loyal former staff members in positions of influence. They assist him in the dispensation of favors to donors from on high. “We’re very excited,” one Republican lobbyist told the Post, the understatement of the century.

Democrats, meanwhile, are so compromised by their own addiction to Big Money they have forgotten their history as champion of the working stiff, the little folks down there at the bottom. The great problems facing everyday people in America – inequality, stagnant wages, children in poverty, our degraded infrastructure and stressed environment — are not being seriously addressed because the political class is afraid to offend the people who write the checks — the corporations and the rich. Everyone else can be safely ignored.

How A Bill Becomes A Law

I think that far too often this is the truth. We get the laws that corporate lobbyists want, and the good of the American people is just an afterthought (if they think of us at all).

Why Congress Can't Understand Your Financial Struggle

The figures above are for Congress in 2012, and represent the median net wealth of the members of Congress (meaning half of the members of Congress are worth more than the figure shown and half are worth less). These are the most recent figures available because the members must submit a financial statement in May of each year, and it takes a substantial amount of time for the good folks at OpenSecrets.org to comb through those reports and decipher them. These figures are from the reports submitted in May of 2013 (and reflect their finances for the previous year).

And this latest Congress passed a landmark percentage. For the first time in this country's history, more than half of the members of Congress are at least millionaires (50.19%, or 268 out of the total 534 members). This surpasses the last Congress, where 48% of the members were at least millionaires. And even most of those who don't quite reach the millionaire status, have significantly more wealth than the majority of Americans.

Even the "poorest" member of Congress (if that word can be applied to any member of Congress) brings home far more than most Americans. While the median income for the general population is slightly above $40,000, A member of Congress (without a leadership position) makes $174,000 (not counting the various expense accounts, tax breaks, generous retirement, and other perks).

Considering the above facts, it becomes obvious that any member of Congress would need a vivid imagination to comprehend the financial struggles of ordinary Americans. Most of them have never had to struggle financially, and those that once did have left those struggles behind long ago. This should give you a clue as to why the policies pursued by many of them favor the rich. They are simply voting to protect their own interests. And those who do try to do something for ordinary Americans usually come up with policies that fall far short of what is really needed -- because that need is not theirs, and they don't comprehend the real need.

And all of that is before you even consider the huge effect that lobbyists have on the policies that Congress pursues. The chart below (also from information provided by OpenSecrets.org) shows the amount of money spent by various interests on lobbying Congress. Only one of those interests represents ordinary working Americans (the Labor lobbyists), and the money it is able to spend pales in comparison to the many billions spent by other lobbyists (representing various business interests).

While those lobbyists are not allowed to give cash or gifts to members of Congress, it has happened many times in the past (and I'm sure most of it was not discovered). And those lobbyists are allowed to pay for plane tickets and hotels for "fact-finding" junkets (which many times are nothing more than expensive vacations). Then we come to campaign funds. Lobbyists funnel big donations into congressional campaign chests, which too often are used to pay large salaries to family members, or saved up for their retirement (when the rules on spending that money are loosened).

Is it any wonder that the interests of the rich and the corporations are foremost in the minds of member of Congress -- and the interests of ordinary Americans are little more than an afterthought for most of them?

Selling Out

This should surprise no one. The 45 senators that voted against closing the loopholes in the background check system for people trying to buy guns (thus killing that legislation) all received money from the gun lobby (NRA, Gun Owners of America, National Association of Gun Rights). They got a total of $7,815,894 -- or an average of $173,686.53 for each senator. Personally, I think they sold out cheap. That's only about a year's salary for those senators.

(Graphic is from Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and the information is from OpenSecrets.org.)

Corporate Lobbyists

This is the main thing that is wrong with our government -- lobbyists have too much power. It has gotten so bad that almost no politician will take a stand until they learn what stand the corporate lobbyists want them to take. And while politicians are elected by the people, their true allegiance is to the corporations (because they can always use religion and lies to fool the people into voting for them again). The politicians don't even have to know how to write a law anymore -- the corporate lobbyists are very willing to write those laws for them.

Favoring The Rich

This is the way our government works. Starting about 1980, as the right-wingers came to power, they tilted the economic playing field to favor the rich. Now the rich get tax breaks, subsidies, and bailouts from the government, while funds to help the poor and needy keep getting cut. It's not fair, but it's what happens when you elect rich men to Congress and they let Wall Street lobbyists write our laws.

Big Oil

How long are we going to put up with the scam Big Oil is running. They are making record profits, far more than most corporations, and yet our government continues to give the billions of dollars in subsidies. And they get away with it because they have been very effective in buying the requisite number of members of Congress. It's time to stop this nonsense. They are not only taking government money they don't need, they are also ruining the environment (and contributing to global climate change). They want us to think they are doing a patriotic service to America, but they really care about nothing but more profits (and adding your tax dollars to make that enormous profit even bigger). Enough!!!

GOP Senator Admonished By Ethics Comm.

The Senate Ethics Committee has publicly admonished ultra-right-wing Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Oklahoma). It seems that Coburn didn't think the senate rules applied to him. Three years ago, the Senate banned the aide of former-Senator Ensign (Doug Hampton) from doing any lobbying. In spite of the ban, Ensign held a meeting and discussed business with Hampton.

The Oklahoman's website said Coburn's action was not a violation of federal law or of senate rules. But while it probably isn't a violation of law, I have to think it was a violation of senate rules. After all, if it's not a violation of senate rules to meet with a banned lobbyist and discuss business, then what's the point of banning lobbyists in the first place.

The Ethics Committee considered it a violation of something, saying the meeting was "improper conduct" and didn't meet the "higher standards expected of a U.S. senator". The public admonishment was the least serious penalty the committee could have leveled against Coburn.

Personally, I think Coburn got off light. He knew the Senate had banned Hampton from doing any lobbying, and showed a disregard for the Senate action by openly violating the ban. He knew better and just didn't care.

The Newest Congressional Lobbyist

The fool in the picture above is John Taylor Bowles. And that ridiculous get-up he's wearing is no bad-taste Halloween costume. He really is a Nazi and a racist -- and he's very proud of it. He ran for president in 2008 as the candidate of the American Nazi Party, and wore his uniform when he campaigned. he said of his presidential run:

 I did that as a sincere effort to show the rest of the National Socialists and white racialists that this is something we can do, and we should have been doing this a long time ago, and it can be done.

Now he is going to Washington in a different capacity. He has officially registered as a lobbyist for the American Nazi Party. He didn't say whether he would be wearing his uniform in the U.S. Capitol, but I suspect he'd better keep that in his closet if he wants to get anywhere near a congressperson (and I suspect they'll still treat him as though he was carrying a deadly communicable disease -- which , in a way, he is).

Here's what he said when asked why he registered as a lobbyist for the American Nazi Party, and what he would be lobbying for:

We have to practice what we preach. We tell people in this country that they need to get out there and practice their constitutional rights, freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. But there's one we seldom use: the freedom to petition the government. So this is the tactic we're trying now, to start petitioning government. This is the first time anybody ever did in America it as a National Socialist. We're going to see if we can have a little bit of influence in Congress, and help them make decisions.


It depends on the issue. Whatever is hot at the time, I'll see what is a valid issue that I can address. Immigration is always a hot topic, but I'll tell you what, the number one issue for me is ballot access laws. They're terrible. It's easier to run for President of Iran than President of the United States.


I would love to know the name of any congressperson who is crazy enough to meet this fool -- let alone actually listen to what he has to say. I was going to say that he'll give lobbyists a bad name, but after some thought, I'm not sure anyone could do that.

The "God Lobby" Is Growing In Washington

Most Americans may believe in a separation between church and state (religion and government) but it look like a lot of so-called "religious" organizations don't. There are about 212 religious groups that spend a ton on money lobbying Congress -- about $390 million a year. This seems like a waste of a lot of money to me, since the Constitution forbids the government from interfering with the free expression of religion by any individual. It also forbids the government from favoring any one religion over others. I suspect that this money is being spent to get around those constitutional guarantees -- to get the government to favor a particular religion or religious belief. I can't help but believe that $390 million could be spent in a better way, like feeding and clothing the poor. After all, aren't we our brother's keeper?

Americans Believe Corporations Have Too Much Power

The Gallup Poll has just released a new survey (done March 25th through March 27th with a total of 1,027 adults, and a margin of error of 4 points). This poll was on whether institutions in this country have too much power or not. Most people agreed that certain institutions (like state and local governments, religion, and the military) don't have more power than they should have. For all four of those about half the population believe their power is about right, and the other half is split between too much power and too little power -- in other words, the numbers are about where they should be.

Two other institutions split along party lines. About 69% of Republicans believe unions have too much power, while only 20% of Democrats believe that. And 75% of Republicans believe the federal government have too much power, while only 34% of Democrats believe that. In both cases Independents fell between the Republicans and Democrats. Again, that is no surprise.

The surprise, at least for me, was that the poll shows that there are three groups that a majority of all Americans believe have too much power (regardless of political belief) -- major corporations, banks/financial institutions, and lobbyists. It looks like America is finally waking up to the fact that our government is too skewed toward corporate and financial interests (and the lobbyists that represent those interests).

This is good news for America and bad news for Republican politicians in Washington and state governments (whose policies favor those corporations and financial interests with subsidies and tax cuts even though they are making record profits and don't need the favoritism they are being shown). Now that Americans have finally realized that too much of government has been turned over to the corporations (who were even allowed to write laws in the Bush administration) maybe something can be done about it.

And I don't just want to pick on the Republicans -- far too many Democrats, especially the "blue dogs", have sold out to corporate interests also. Voters need to expunge the politicians of both parties that favor corporate and banking interests over the interests of ordinary Americans -- and the sooner this is done the better it will be for this country and most of its citizens.

Here are the numbers on Americans who think corporation, banks, and lobbyists have too much power:

MAJOR CORPORATIONS
All Americans...............67%
Republicans...............56%
Independents...............69%
Democrats...............73%

BANKS/FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS
All Americans...............67%
Republicans...............58%
Independents...............70%
Democrats...............70%

LOBBYISTS
All Americans...............71%
Republicans...............70%
Independents...............75%
Democrats...............68%

Now if Americans would just vote those beliefs we would all be better off.

Speaker Boehner Has A Lobbyist Girlfriend

Before the last elections, Rep. John Boehner cautioned his Republican brothers to rein in their sexual desires, even having private chats with some of them. He wanted to avoid any scandals that might derail the Republicans' quest to return to power. But it looks like he has failed to heed his own advice.

The National Enquirer is coming out with a story about Speaker Boehner breaking his own marriage vows with a couple of girlfriends of his own. One is congressional press secretary Leigh LaMora, and the other is a congressional lobbyist -- Lisbeth Lyons. Some might question the source, but remember, it was the Enquirer that exposed the infidelity of John Edwards. And they turned out to be right on target with that one. Additionally, there have been rumors of Boehner's infidelity floating around for a while now.

It's bad enough that Boehner would break his own rules and desecrate his own marriage, but having sexual relations with a lobbyist ups the ante substantially. It puts his political decisions in question. Lobbyists exist to influence politicians to support their clients by passing or eliminating laws which affect those clients. And there are laws to prevent those lobbyists from buying influence with those politicians.

But money is not the only way to buy influence. There are also sexual favors (and blackmail to keep indiscretions a secret). Having a lobbyist girlfriend calls into question any decisions Boehner might make in the House of Representatives. Is he bringing up a bill (or blocking a bill) because he thinks it's good for America, or as a payback for sexual favors? And do the Republicans really want a tainted Speaker as they struggle to return to power?

It is one thing to oppose the politics of a Speaker. It is quite different to be unable to trust a Speaker. Maybe it's time for the Republicans to consider replacing Boehner (even though he's had the position less than a month).

Swinford Resigns - Will Go For The Money

Republican State Rep. David Swinford, House District 87 representative from the Texas Panhandle, had already announced that he would not run for re-election. He did not run in his party's primary last Spring and was set to retire when his term expired in January. He will be replaced by either Democrat Abel Bosquez, Republican Walter Price IV, or Libertarian James Hudspeth.

But those dollar signs just kept getting bigger and bigger in his eyes and he finally couldn't stand it any longer. On August 26th, Swinford sent a letter to Governor Perry in which he said he would retire on August 31st. He said in the letter, "After much discussion and consultation with District 87's leaders, community leaders and good friends, I have decided the greatest parting gift to my constituents would be to retire early."

I won't dispute that his retirement is indeed a gift to the residents of the Panhandle, but that's not why he's retiring early. In a word it's -- MONEY. He was set to take a lobbying job (after all, there's only 1500 lobbyists in Austin), but now he's also been offered a job as a consultant. He's still trying to decide which one he wants to take, but you can be sure it'll pay 10 or 15 times his salary as a state representative (at a minimum).

Swinford has spent 20 years representing the Panhandle in Austin and has made a lot of political friends. He could be very valuable to someone wanting something from the legislature, and he's planning to get the big bucks while the getting is good.

Frankly, this sort of thing shouldn't even be allowed. It has a definite stink of the unethical. Representatives (and senators) in the state legislature should not be allowed to become lobbyists or "consultants" for several years after they leave their elected legislative job (10 years sounds about right to me). These legislators were elected to serve the people of their district, not to set themselves up for a high-paying influence-peddling position.

Swinford was also playing party politics with the early retirement. He was hoping to get the governor to call a special election to fill out the remainder of his term -- a special election that would be held on the same day as the general election in November. Since the same person would probably win both the special election and the general election, that person could be sworn in early and would have about two months seniority over other freshmen legislators elected in the general election.

But to my surprise (and to his credit), the governor is not going to call a special election. His spokeswoman says "the timing and the circumstances of Swinford's resignation don't merit it." I have to agree with the governor. A special election held on the same day as the general election would just be an exercise in silliness.

Good riddance to Swinford. Now we just have to see if we can elect someone better to replace him.

Texas Officials Love Lobbyists

How much money can you afford to spend on treating your legislator and other state officials, to take them to dinner or send them on an all-expense paid vacation? If you're like most Texas citizens, the answer is zero. In this economy you're probably just trying to hang on to your job so you can feed, clothe and shelter your family.

But corporations don't have that problem, and their lobbyists are spending millions on those same Texas officials. According to the Houston Chronicle, that spending by lobbyists is more than $12.8 million in the last four years. That's a ton of money for a state whose legislature only meets for 140 days every other year.

According to the Chronicle, over $3.5 million was spent directly on Texas legislators, and another $3.8 million on members of their staffs. Now Texas only has 150 members of the Texas House and 32 members of the Texas Senate -- that's just 182 total legislators. Doing a little math, that's over $19,230 per legislator (not counting what was spent on their staff).

Even worse, most of this money spent on our state officials doesn't even have to be reported. That's because back in 2003, the Republican legislature nearly doubled the amount that could be spent without the lobbyist (or the legislator) having to report it.

In essence, the lobbyists are buying access to our state officials -- access that the private citizen does not have and can not get. Is it any wonder that new laws and regulations always seem to favor the corporations rather than the common man?

We need some new laws regulating lobbyists. Ideally, lobbyists should not be able to buy anything for or give anything to any state official. At the very least, they should be forced to report everything (even down to a $1.00 double cheeseburger at McDonalds).

Quite simply, the people of Texas have a right to know who is buying access to our state officials, and for how much.

Americans Not Buying Clinton's Assurances

Last week, Hillary Clinton was asked to stop taking money from the K Street lobbyists. She refused saying, "I don't think, based on my 35 years of fighting for what I believe in, anybody seriously believes I'm going to be influenced by a lobbyist." I thought it was a ridiculous statement at the time. How could anyone not be influenced by the kind of money these lobbyists pour into a campaign?

It looks like the American people aren't believing her assurances either. Rasmussen conducted a survey of 800 likely voters on August 6th and 7th. According to their poll, only 25% of the people believe that Clinton would not be influenced by receiving lobbyists' money. A full 48% believe she would be influenced, and another 28% say they just don't know.

Clinton should probably rethink her position on accepting this tainted money. Americans are fed up with the lobbyists, and that is true of both parties and independents.

Clinton went on to say, "A lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans." When asked if lobbyists represent real Americans, 67% of Democrats, 69% of Republicans and 78% of independents said NO. Americans know who these lobbyists represent.

They represent groups like USINPAC, which represents Indian Americans and lobbys for the outsourcing of American jobs. This group raised over $3 million for Clinton in just one fund-raising effort. They raised this money for her because they know she supports the outsourcing of American jobs.

Lobbyists may not be the most ethical people, but they are not stupid. They are not going to waste millions of dollars on a candidate that they cannot influence.

Is Clinton Selling Out To K Street ?

One of the biggest disappointments of the current Republican regime was how they sold their souls and their votes to the K Street lobbyists (K street is the Washington, DC street where many lobbyists have their offices). Due to their huge campaign contributions and other gifts, many of these lobbyists were even allowed to write some of the bills presented by the White House (especially economic and oil & energy bills).

But these lobbyists are not stupid people. They can sense the way the political winds are blowing. That is why they are now trying to throw money at candidates in the Democratic party. If the Democrats are going to take over in Washington after the 2008 election, these lobbyists want to buy as many Democrats as they can now, so they won't be left out in the cold after the election.

Fortunately many of the Democrats aren't taking their money, but some are. Hillary Clinton is one of the candidates taking money from the lobbyists. During the DailyKos convention attended by many bloggers, she was asked to stop taking money from the lobbyists and refused. She even had the audacity to say she would not be influenced by the lobbyists.

Sadly, it looks like Clinton is starting to think that the people are stupid. How can anyone not be influenced by lobbyists donating millions of dollars to their campaign? At the very least, these lobbyists are buying access that is denied to ordinary citizens. When it comes time for legislation affecting their rich clients, these lobbists will have her ear (and probably her support).

Last week, I detailed on this blog how Clinton now supports the outsourcing of American jobs, and is accepting millions in donations from groups that benefit from that outsourcing. Now we learn that those aren't the only lobbyists she is accepting money from. What other progressive ideas is she willing to give up to be elected president?

Clinton got upset a couple of weeks ago when Obama called her "Bush/Cheney lite". But it is starting to look like he was even more right than he realized. Will she continue the same corporate-oriented politics of the current administration? Her eager acceptance of huge donations from lobbyists makes me think that she will.

Couple her support of outsourcing and her acceptance of lobbyists donations with her views on Iraq, and her campaign becomes very troubling to true progressives. It was bad enough that she voted for the illegal Iraq war, but now she doesn't even support a complete withdrawal from Iraq. She wants to leave some of our soldiers there -- perhaps for many years!

It's beginning to look like Clinton's desire to become president is stronger than her progressive ideals.